View Single Post
Old 02-06-2013, 11:04 PM
turfmd101's Avatar
turfmd101 turfmd101 is offline
LawnSite Bronze Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,085
Originally Posted by JWTurfguy View Post
If some of these other blenders (Shaws, etc) were capable of blending TCS-quality fertilizer, wouldn't they have been doing it already? What "specs" could JDL possibly be giving them, considering that TCS would have owned the "specs," not JDL.

That's like selling your BMW and telling your KIA salesman that you want your new car to be just like the BMW...
The specs, are based on the types of raw materials used in blending.

LESCO was never blending for the Ag. Market. Since day one, LESCO's customers wanted good clean fert because, they do residential and commercial plus golf. Nothing for farming. They focused on CLEAN fert. Because they had most of that market share business. When LESCO sold its manufacturing plants to TCS. TCS, continued blending clean fert for LESCO/JDL because there market base was still NOT agriculture customers.

With all due respect... Manufacturers of fertilizer for the agriculture business side weren't as picky with the raw materials because they were more interested in price because farmers don't charge for fert app's. It's strictly a cost. Not one to make money with. Just a cost.

At this point. It all has to do with the type of quality requirements they have needed the last 50 years. I feel farmers weren't complaining about the cleanliness of the bag. But more about price. Now these manufacturers will be doing more blending to a larger, different type of blend requirements for people doing production to make money. They just have never focused on, quality raw material. There large customer base, 90% Ag, never cared more than price. Lesco/JDL customers DO. They just need to understand what there large new customer base needs more than price. Buying higher quality materials effects MARGINS, what all businesses live on. To different for them.
Posted via Mobile Device
Reply With Quote
Page generated in 0.04263 seconds with 8 queries